Xref: utzoo comp.sources.bugs:2829 comp.mail.uucp:5823
Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!eci386!woods
From: woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.bugs,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: smail-2.5 fix for domain gateway routing
Keywords: Patchlevel?
Message-ID: <1991Feb3.144753.5884@eci386.uucp>
Date: 3 Feb 91 14:47:53 GMT
References: <1991Jan23.061830.19719@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1991Jan24.034941.3360@Sandelman.OCUnix.On.Ca> <1991Jan30.195213.12815@eci386.uucp> <1991Feb1.024031.1859@redpoll.neoucom.edu>
Reply-To: woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
Organization: Elegant Communications, Inc.
Lines: 58

In article <1991Feb1.024031.1859@redpoll.neoucom.edu> red@redpoll.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew) writes:
> 
>      This discussion seems to have come full circle.

Well, I do remember posting some questions and complaints way back
when I first discovered the problem.  Now I've posted the fix.

>      Unless I've misunderstood, Smail 2.5 handles domains correctly, at
> least at patchlevel 3.

Fine for those who have access to "Patch #: 03", whatever that is, and
if indeed it is "official".  I've never heard of it.

>      A paths file entry of:
> .site.domain	gateway!%s
> fed an address of user@foo.site.domain results in a path of:
> gateway!foo.site.domain!user
> 
>     Isn't that what it is supposed to do?

Yes!  That's why I fixed "Patch #: 00" and posted the patch.

>     Could it be that the "problem" was already fixed in the first
> three patches?  A "patched" kit is available by anonymous ftp from
> tut.cis.ohio-state.edu.  The "smart-host" function also works in this
> version, unlike the patchlevel 0 version archived at many places.

Thanks millions guys for not posting the damn patches to the net in
the "proper" places.

I've been running smail-2.5 since it came out, and 2.3 before that,
and I've been running sites with news all that time too.  I've *NEVER*
seen official smail patches posted.  Mailers are very dear to me, and
I can assure you I would remember seeing such patches if they had been
posted anywhere such patches should be posted.

BTW, smart-host works fine in my "Patch #: 00" version.

There are numerous other little problems I have not fixed.  There is
the outstanding question of lookup order of ".site.domain" and
"site.domain", incorrect "Received:" line generation, a few minor
portability problems, XENIX incompatibility, etc.

Would the keeper of this "patched" kit kindly submit it and/or the
patches to comp.sources.unix, comp.sources.bugs and comp.mail.uucp?
There has been nothing new for smail in c.s.u since Volume 11, ending
Oct. 6, 1987, where the version I'm running was posted.

What version is on uunet?

Not everyone has access to ftp on the Internet, nor do all of us want
it, or find it necessary.  Only when something like this happens do I
think the Internet clique is out to get me!  :-(
-- 
							Greg A. Woods
woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP		ECI and UniForum Canada
+1-416-443-1734 [h]  +1-416-595-5425 [w]  VE3TCP	Toronto, Ontario CANADA
Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible-ORWELL